After Superman, It's Time To Bring Robert Pattinson's Batman Into James Gunn's DCU
by Devin Meenan · /Film"Superman" is here. The film's continued box office performance will be critical in determining just how much of a success it is, but so far, things are looking up. If "Superman" keeps soaring like it did opening weekend, then this DC Universe thing might actually work!
But the complication to that premise has always been Batman. Matt Reeves' 2022 "The Batman" was a critical success (just read/Film's own review) and got a solid box office gross ($772 million), so you don't want to just throw that away. But Reeves' intention for a Batman trilogy starring Robert Pattinson, with the creative freedom to make the movies he wants, predates James Gunn and Peter Safran's DC Studios. You can't have a DC Universe without Batman!
So far, the line has been that Reeves' "Batman Epic Crime Saga" is going forward, but as a side thing, cordoned off from the DCU. Reeves and co-writer Mattson Tomlin recently completed their script for "The Batman" sequel, a script Warner Bros. is reportedly "thrilled with." Meanwhile, one of the first DCU projects Gunn and Safran announced was another Batman movie, "The Brave and the Bold," to be directed by Andy Muschietti. But after "Superman," I'm convinced more than ever they should cut the knot and only have one onscreen Batman: Robert Pattinson.
I get why not everyone is down for this. "The Batman" is so great because it's a complete, almost uncompromised vision. The film stands on its own, more concerned with exploring Batman's inner world than building out a "shared universe" around him. Putting the setting under the larger DC umbrella risks diluting it; the DCU would probably benefit from including Pattinson-Batman more than the other way around.
If I'm sitting in James Gunn's seat, though, it sounds much safer to use the Batman people already like than it is to try and have two separate Batman actors at the same time. The fans are now crying for David Corenswet's Superman to meet Pattinson's Batman. In this rare case, I think the best move is to give the people what they want.
Batman and Superman should contrast each other
The main reason why many say "The Batman" and "Superman" shouldn't cross over is that the movies couldn't be further apart tonally. "Superman" is a cheerful crowd pleaser filled with super soft Silver Age science-fiction from pocket universes to kaiju to evil clones and more. "The Batman" is a dark and grimy serial killer mystery with a Batman who jams to Nirvana.
"Superman" also establishes that metahumans have been around a long time in the DC Universe, whereas "The Batman" follows in the semi-realism charted by Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight." Reeves' Gotham City has all the fantasy stripped out and seems to be in a world where Batman is the only masked crimefighter.
But the whole point of Superman meeting Batman is how much they and their worlds contrast with each other. Superman smiles, Batman frowns. Superman dresses in bright colors, Batman keeps to the dark. They're both ultimately idealistic men, but Superman leans on the hopeful side of that, whereas Batman is very much "trust but verify." Superman is a godlike alien who chooses to be human, and Batman is a normal man who pushes himself past the impossible. In Metropolis, the sun never seems to set, and in Gotham City, it never appears to rise.
One reason that Zack Snyder's "Batman v. Superman" fell flat is that in that movie, there was no contrast between the two heroes. Both Batman (Ben Affleck) and Superman (Henry Cavill) were stoic, silent, and broody, and thus too alike to be foils. Whereas Corenswet's plucky aw-shucks Superman is light years away from Pattinson's withdrawn, grungy Batman, which creates more opportunities for them to play off each other.
James Gunn's DCU will embrace tonal inconsistency
Unlike the tonal homogeneity of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, Gunn has said (in an interview with IGN) the DCU movies will work like the DC Comics, i.e., different tones depending on what the artists making them want to do. The different niches of the DC Universe don't always feel like they should fit together, because the big heroes were all created by different people and not originally intended to congeal. Batman exemplifies that best of all. The Batman who goes on dark, violent adventures like "The Cult" by Jim Starlin and Bernie Wrightson is the same Batman who shows up every week to help the Justice League fight off colorful alien invaders.
But I'm hard-pressed to think this is a bad thing. Let filmmakers tell the best stories possible and don't constrain them to a uniform aesthetic; Gunn's attitude makes it seem like Reeves wouldn't be completely forfeiting creative freedom if they brought his Batman over. There's also the fact that canon in the DCU is already loose. To explain characters from Gunn's DC Extended Universe canon, "The Suicide Squad" and "Peacemaker" carrying over, Gunn explained (in a 2023 post on Threads):
"Some actors will be playing characters they've played in other stories & some plot points might be consistent with plot points from the dozens of films, shows & animated projects that have come from DC in the past."
I say apply this principle to Pattinson; use him as the DCU's Batman, no matter how vague you have to keep the continuity. Making someone else play Batman at the same time as Pattinson is setting that new actor up for failure. Pattinson also has enough range as an actor that he can be any kind of Batman Gunn wants ... so use him.
"Superman" is playing in theaters. "The Batman" sequel is currently scheduled for release on October 1, 2027.